Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 ... 5
Send Topic Print
Indonesian law spreading Islamism (Read 2690 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 35049
At my desk.
Indonesian law spreading Islamism
May 11th, 2019 at 8:47am
 
Jakarta’s Chinese Christian governor, Ahok, was jailed for blasphemy. His ‘crime’ was to argue that Islam does not forbid Muslims from voting for him, referring to verse Al-Maidah 51 of the Quran. This was in response to a widespread movement calling on Muslims to vote him out in the name of Islam. Many people argued the opposite – that Islam does forbid Muslims from voting for a non-Muslim (also referring to Al-Maidah 51). None of them were jailed for blasphemy.

...

I cannot tell which, but Gandalf is either blind to what is going on or actively trying to conceal it. This is peculiar, given that it is his style of interpreting Islam that is being targeted by Indonesian blasphemy laws. He claims to be a progressive Muslim, but apologises for the extremists at every opportunity. Indonesian law is blatantly and consistently targeting one side of the debate about Islam in Indonesia. This will inevitably shape public debate and opinion about Islam, in the opposite direction to that which Gandalf claims he wishes to steer it, but Gandalf still attempts to project his fantasy of a “free marketplace of ideas” onto Indonesia.

One of the arguments he has put forward was that this was a politically motivated jailing. Islam, however is a political movement. Muhammad was a political, religious and military leader, who was also fond of imposing Islam on people against their will. Thus, what is happening in Indonesia is not out of place in the history of Islam. I am not sure how this argument is supposed to work. Being politically motivated does not mean it is not happening, and a blasphemy law is inevitably going to be politically charged. Perhaps that is why Gandalf moved on without explaining.

He flipped between a variety of other arguments, most of them resting on misrepresenting what I say. For example, he claimed that my argument was that existence of a blasphemy law alone (ie, in the absence of enforcement) was undermining freedom of speech and steering public debate. He also claimed that my argument was that the jailing of Ahok alone was doing the same. He tried various versions of this theme – taking a single statement of mine and falsely claiming it was the entirety of my argument. Yet even when he misrepresented my argument this way, he was still unable to counter it. Indonesia jails a lot of people for blasphemy, as Gandalf’s own evidence demonstrates.

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 19th, 2019 at 11:55am:
23 people in 4 years, 125 in the previous decade...


In addition, there were three colossal rallies calling for Ahok's jailing for insulting Islam. This is not just a legal or top-down political action. It is backed by a grass-roots support base, though that support base is no doubt reinforced by the way public debate on Islam has been steered. Indonesia is headed towards a dark place, and even the ‘progressive’ Muslims blind themselves to the reality.

Most recently, Gandalf changed tactic again and tried to argue that the Islamists are also being jailed for what they say about Islam. Again, this relies on a misrepresentation. None have been jailed for blasphemy, but they have been jailed for encouraging violence, hate speech, etc. Gandalf has attempted (but failed) to misrepresent this as being jailed for what they say about Islam. We are still waiting for him to provide an example that is not based on his paraphrasing of what they said and misrepresentation of what was done.

freediver wrote on May 8th, 2019 at 7:28pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on May 8th, 2019 at 11:37am:
freediver wrote on May 7th, 2019 at 9:46pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on May 3rd, 2019 at 12:02pm:
Here you go FD, the full quote:

freediver wrote on Feb 22nd, 2019 at 9:49am:
You seem completely oblivious to what is going on here Gandalf. Islamic extremists in Indonesia can say whatever they want. People who offer progressive interpretations of Islam get put in jail, very publicly. The government is transparently steering debate about Islam in Indonesia towards the extreme, and you are cheering them on.


The reality:

- Indonesia extremists are routinely charged and gaoled for what they say about Islam - under the charge of "hate speech".
- Islamist groups including Hizbut tahrir are banned for what they say about Islam
- The government therefore is transparently steering debate about Islam in Indonesia away from the extreme



Can you give an example?


I have given you several already.

Here's just one:

Quote:
Musician Ahmad Dhani was sentenced to 18 months in prison by South Jakarta District Court on Monday for hate speech in connection with a tweet he posted in March that incited people to attack supporters of former Jakarta governor Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, who now prefers to be called “BTP” but who was formerly known as “Ahok”.


https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2019/01/28/ahmad-dhani-gets-18-months-for-in...

Also, do you think that he fact that Hizbut tahrir - a known Islamist political group - is banned in Indonesia is consistent with your claim that "Islamic extremists in Indonesia can say whatever they want"?


What did he say about Islam?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 35049
At my desk.
Re: Indonesian law spreading Islamism
Reply #1 - May 11th, 2019 at 8:48am
 
freediver wrote on May 9th, 2019 at 12:46pm:
Quote:
He said people supporting blasphemers should be spat on.


That doesn't sound like he is saying anything about Islam. Can you give any actual examples?


freediver wrote on May 9th, 2019 at 8:47pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on May 9th, 2019 at 3:33pm:
This is where we are at.

FD says that an Islamist calling blasphemers to be spat on - "doesn't sound like he is saying anything about Islam".

Where do you go after that? There really isn't any adequate response.

We have arrived at peak stupid, and it is simply pointless to continue.

I won't even bother chasing FD up for his continued dodging of my Hizbut tahrir question. I won't ask him a 3rd time.





What did he actually say Gandalf?


Some previous discussions:

Indonesia - don't vote infidel

Jailed for Blasphemy Indonesia - Indonesian Buddhist woman's blasphemy conviction upheld

Where is, the 'exemplar' moslem majority nation ?

If you care, PAY ATTENTION, to what they say

Islam is unreformable. Never ever.

When superstition becomes law.

Jakarta Governor questioned by police

Islam strangled western civilisation

Ahok lost election

Islam greatest threat to freedom and democracy

Rally against blasphemy - According to the ABC half a million Indonesian Muslims turned up to the second "let's destroy freedom in the name of Islam" sermon.

spineless apologetics

Sharia Law in Aceh

Caning in Aceh increasing
Back to top
« Last Edit: May 11th, 2019 at 9:10am by freediver »  

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 18947
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Indonesian law spreading Islamism
Reply #2 - May 17th, 2019 at 10:28am
 
FD do you consider banning Islamist groups like Hizb ut tahrir is Indonesian law spreading Islamism?

Funny I mentioned this ban about 5 times in the other thread and you avoided it every time.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 35049
At my desk.
Re: Indonesian law spreading Islamism
Reply #3 - May 17th, 2019 at 12:57pm
 
It is an attempt to contain non-state-sanctioned violence. It is not an attempt to contain Islamic extremism. You tried to pass it off as punishing them for what they say about Islam.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 18947
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Indonesian law spreading Islamism
Reply #4 - May 17th, 2019 at 2:22pm
 
Thats funny because Hizb ut tahrir are strictly non-violent.

So if its not for violence, and apparently its definitely not for what they say about Islam - why do you think they were banned?
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 35049
At my desk.
Re: Indonesian law spreading Islamism
Reply #5 - May 18th, 2019 at 3:51pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on May 17th, 2019 at 2:22pm:
Thats funny because Hizb ut tahrir are strictly non-violent.

So if its not for violence, and apparently its definitely not for what they say about Islam - why do you think they were banned?


Oh look, a Muslim lying about Jihad.

Roll Eyes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hizb_ut-Tahrir#Jihad

HT texts define Jihad as "war undertaken for the sake of Allah (swt) to raise high His (swt)[Note 23] word" and requiring an army (Institutions of State in the Khilafah).[143][144] They declare the necessity of jihad so that Da'wah will be carried "to all mankind" and will "bring them into the Khilafah state," and the importance of declaring "Jihad against the Kuffar without any lenience or hesitation;" (Ummah's Charter),[125][145] as well as the need to fight unbelievers who refuse to be ruled by Islam, even if they pay tribute (The Islamic Personality).
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Yadda
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 14865
A cat with a view
Re: Indonesian law spreading Islamism
Reply #6 - May 18th, 2019 at 5:27pm
 
freediver wrote on May 18th, 2019 at 3:51pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on May 17th, 2019 at 2:22pm:

Thats funny because Hizb ut tahrir are strictly non-violent.

So if its not for violence, and apparently its definitely not for what they say about Islam - why do you think they were banned?





Oh look, a Muslim lying about Jihad.




Roll Eyes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hizb_ut-Tahrir#Jihad

HT texts define Jihad as "war undertaken for the sake of Allah (swt) to raise high His (swt)[Note 23] word" and requiring an army (Institutions of State in the Khilafah).[143][144] They declare the necessity of jihad so that Da'wah will be carried "to all mankind" and will "bring them into the Khilafah state," and the importance of declaring "Jihad against the Kuffar without any lenience or hesitation;" (Ummah's Charter),[125][145] as well as the need to fight unbelievers who refuse to be ruled by Islam, even if they pay tribute (The Islamic Personality).





That's, not news!
     Sad





Quote:

Peace and love are at the center of our religion, as evidenced by scripture and history,...”


- Sheikh Abdullah Bin Bayyah
CITED... https://www.jihadwatch.org/2019/02/uae-forum-promotes-dubious-islamic-peace





.





IMAGE...
...

Sheikh Yassir al-Burhami



Quote:

How Circumstance Dictates Islamic Behavior


January 18, 2012

Preach Peace When Weak, Wage War When Strong

"...all notions of peace with non-Muslims are based on circumstance.

When Muslims are weak, they should be peaceful; when strong, they should go on the offensive."


Sheikh Yassir al-Burhami - an ISLAMIC scholar and Egyptian Salafi leader
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/from-the-arab-world/how-circumstance-dictates-isla...



.



DECEIT;

Quote:

A Study in Muslim Doctrine

"...while sincere friendship with non-Muslims is forbidden,

insincere friendship - whenever beneficial to Muslims - is not."


http://www.meforum.org/2512/nidal-hasan-fort-hood-muslim-doctrine




Back to top
 

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." Luke 16:31
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 18947
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Indonesian law spreading Islamism
Reply #7 - May 21st, 2019 at 2:16pm
 
freediver wrote on May 18th, 2019 at 3:51pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on May 17th, 2019 at 2:22pm:
Thats funny because Hizb ut tahrir are strictly non-violent.

So if its not for violence, and apparently its definitely not for what they say about Islam - why do you think they were banned?


Oh look, a Muslim lying about Jihad.

Roll Eyes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hizb_ut-Tahrir#Jihad

HT texts define Jihad as "war undertaken for the sake of Allah (swt) to raise high His (swt)[Note 23] word" and requiring an army (Institutions of State in the Khilafah).[143][144] They declare the necessity of jihad so that Da'wah will be carried "to all mankind" and will "bring them into the Khilafah state," and the importance of declaring "Jihad against the Kuffar without any lenience or hesitation;" (Ummah's Charter),[125][145] as well as the need to fight unbelievers who refuse to be ruled by Islam, even if they pay tribute (The Islamic Personality).


I didn't mention Jihad FD, I mentioned Hizb ut Tahrir and their rejection of violence.

Can you produce any shred of evidence that they were banned because of their threat of violence (despite renouncing violence) - or are you going to make another brilliant attempt at deductive reasoning?

Meanwhile, here's some actual evidence to ponder:

Quote:
Hizb ut-Tahrir was banned in Indonesia on the basis of a 2017 presidential decree that gives the government powers to disband groups deemed a threat to national unity.

The ruling on Monday upheld that decision, with the judicial panel stating that the government had acted according to procedure and Hizb ut-Tahrir runs counter to Indonesia’s state ideology.


...

Quote:
Elliott said the group, which has been banned in several other countries, was an easier target than some Indonesian organisations that have a demonstrated pattern of violence.

The decision to ban Hizb ut-Tahrir, he said, could backfire. “HTI was unique in that it strictly adhered to a policy of non-violence, so now there is a risk of these 10,000 former members saying, ‘OK, well we were a legal mass organisation, we played by the rules and that didn’t work.’ So some of them could gravitate towards violence,” Elliott said.


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/07/indonesia-jakarta-court-rejects-hi...

FD could you explain the logic of potentially provoking a previously non-violent organisation to resort to violence - when your main concern was to stop violence from them in the first place?
Back to top
« Last Edit: May 21st, 2019 at 2:25pm by polite_gandalf »  

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 35049
At my desk.
Re: Indonesian law spreading Islamism
Reply #8 - May 21st, 2019 at 9:37pm
 
Is the wikipedia article wrong Gandalf?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Abu
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 66589
Gender: male
Re: Indonesian law spreading Islamism
Reply #9 - May 22nd, 2019 at 10:59am
 
polite_gandalf wrote on May 21st, 2019 at 2:16pm:
freediver wrote on May 18th, 2019 at 3:51pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on May 17th, 2019 at 2:22pm:
Thats funny because Hizb ut tahrir are strictly non-violent.

So if its not for violence, and apparently its definitely not for what they say about Islam - why do you think they were banned?


Oh look, a Muslim lying about Jihad.

Roll Eyes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hizb_ut-Tahrir#Jihad

HT texts define Jihad as "war undertaken for the sake of Allah (swt) to raise high His (swt)[Note 23] word" and requiring an army (Institutions of State in the Khilafah).[143][144] They declare the necessity of jihad so that Da'wah will be carried "to all mankind" and will "bring them into the Khilafah state," and the importance of declaring "Jihad against the Kuffar without any lenience or hesitation;" (Ummah's Charter),[125][145] as well as the need to fight unbelievers who refuse to be ruled by Islam, even if they pay tribute (The Islamic Personality).


I didn't mention Jihad FD, I mentioned Hizb ut Tahrir and their rejection of violence.

Can you produce any shred of evidence that they were banned because of their threat of violence (despite renouncing violence) - or are you going to make another brilliant attempt at deductive reasoning?

Meanwhile, here's some actual evidence to ponder:

Quote:
Hizb ut-Tahrir was banned in Indonesia on the basis of a 2017 presidential decree that gives the government powers to disband groups deemed a threat to national unity.

The ruling on Monday upheld that decision, with the judicial panel stating that the government had acted according to procedure and Hizb ut-Tahrir runs counter to Indonesia’s state ideology.


...

Quote:
Elliott said the group, which has been banned in several other countries, was an easier target than some Indonesian organisations that have a demonstrated pattern of violence.

The decision to ban Hizb ut-Tahrir, he said, could backfire. “HTI was unique in that it strictly adhered to a policy of non-violence, so now there is a risk of these 10,000 former members saying, ‘OK, well we were a legal mass organisation, we played by the rules and that didn’t work.’ So some of them could gravitate towards violence,” Elliott said.


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/07/indonesia-jakarta-court-rejects-hi...

FD could you explain the logic of potentially provoking a previously non-violent organisation to resort to violence - when your main concern was to stop violence from them in the first place?


And their leader is a dirty Pakistani Bastard:

Quote:
Wahid has a well-organised mind, perhaps in part the product of his upbringing. His own family came to the UK from Pakistan. His father worked as a travel agent and made many sacrifices to send his son to Merchant Taylors’, a private school in north London. He also understands Britain, and the contradictions embedded in the British identity, uncomfortably well.

He is widely read, too. Before I leave, I look at the books on the wall. There is the collection of commentaries on the Qur’an by Sayyid Qutb, the Muslim Brotherhood theorist who has executed in Egypt by Nasser in 1966, and became (in part through Ayman al-Zawahiri) one of the inspirations for al-Qaida. Kissinger’s Diplomacy is there, as is Niall Ferguson’s Empire and Robert Peston’s Who Runs Britain?, alongside Dirty Wars by Jeremy Scahill and Ibn Khaldun’s masterpiece Al Muqaddimah: “It’s a very good book. I actually got it when I was working in obstetrics, and there is a chapter on midwifery which is fantastic.”

A man’s bookshelves can hardly be said to define him. All the same, they do teach an ironic lesson about the range of allowable voices. You can say many things about Wahid, and be appalled by much of what he says. But in a democracy he surely has the right to say it. Whatever the government thinks.


University of Balogney, innit.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 18947
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Indonesian law spreading Islamism
Reply #10 - May 22nd, 2019 at 2:13pm
 
freediver wrote on May 21st, 2019 at 9:37pm:
Is the wikipedia article wrong Gandalf?


You quoted a wiki article about jihad FD, how the firetruck does that validate what you say about Hizb ut tahrir and why they were banned? And how does it show that I'm a liar?
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 35049
At my desk.
Re: Indonesian law spreading Islamism
Reply #11 - May 22nd, 2019 at 7:10pm
 
It was from the wikipedia article on HT Gandalf.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 18947
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Indonesian law spreading Islamism
Reply #12 - May 23rd, 2019 at 11:40am
 
freediver wrote on May 22nd, 2019 at 7:10pm:
It was from the wikipedia article on HT Gandalf.


ok.

And you cherry picked it.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 18947
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Indonesian law spreading Islamism
Reply #13 - May 23rd, 2019 at 2:51pm
 
freediver wrote on May 17th, 2019 at 12:57pm:
It is an attempt to contain non-state-sanctioned violence. It is not an attempt to contain Islamic extremism. You tried to pass it off as punishing them for what they say about Islam.


Come to think of it FD, if HUT haven't actually carried out any violence (and I see no evidence that they have), how do you think the government found out they were a violent threat?

Do you think maybe it was because of what they said?
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 35049
At my desk.
Re: Indonesian law spreading Islamism
Reply #14 - May 24th, 2019 at 5:38am
 
polite_gandalf wrote on May 23rd, 2019 at 11:40am:
freediver wrote on May 22nd, 2019 at 7:10pm:
It was from the wikipedia article on HT Gandalf.


ok.

And you cherry picked it.


Are you accusing me of quoting the relevant part Gandalf?

Would you like to retract your claim about HT being strictly non-violent?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 5
Send Topic Print